|
|
Post by Dr. Drum on Mar 12, 2006 8:31:10 GMT -5
DR DRUM! Adore was OK but MACHINA takes the bullet? WHY? Well, to quote the immortal Kasey Kasem, wayved, I found Machina "ponderous, f'in ponderous, man". The whole thing felt like a reaction to the critical/fan backlash against Adore. Which wouldn’t have mattered, of course, if it had been any good. But it wasn’t. The songs aren’t anything memorable ("Glass and the Ghost Children"??) and the way the sound’s gummed up there’s no dynamic, no bite, to the thing at all. As for Cohen, I know you’re talking about the instrumentation on the record when you say karaoke. But there’s a sense in which a detractor could throw that at him anyway, just for the quality of his voice, even on the older records. Obviously, I like his voice, I think he knows how to deliver a lyric as well as write one, but I guess we can all see where the resistance comes from for non-fans, eh? As for "Jazz Police" it was only ever meant as a joke and I think even Cohen partially disowned it afterwards. Take it for what it’s worth, though, and you can still enjoy it. |
|
|
|
Post by kool on Mar 12, 2006 17:55:16 GMT -5
There are some great tracks on Machina, but the awful production is what kills that album. Flood has a tendency of doing that from time to time.
|
|
|
|
Post by limitdeditionlayla on Mar 12, 2006 21:42:17 GMT -5
Primal Scream - Probably about half their catalogue JLLM is jealous because Bobby Gillespie has prettier hair |
|
|
|
Post by wayved on Mar 12, 2006 22:38:15 GMT -5
Dr. Drum: There is no resistance! I am a not a non fan of Cohens--the day I heard his first album -- the Songs of Leonard Cohen--I was obsessed. It was the craziest stuff I had ever heard--The nest few weeks afterward were a cohen fest. I just did not understand why a person throwing out such great lyrics had such a weak musical sense by the time I got to Im Your Man. Its not a cheap shot im taking at him, I am saying its a SHAME--at least for selfish reasons. I understand alot of time had elapsed and maybe he just wanted to say something and didn't care about who accompanys....but as someone who pays for every disc every time they come out its like--"CMON!" The music could (should) compliment what hes saying. Maybe Im not listening closely enough....I really dont think thats the case.
About Machina--Hey I understand what you're saying. I really liked Machina. I still do--listened to it the other day--there are a few crap songs but the album was an hour long! Most of it sounds great! maybe I need to do the same thing with Adore (which I played alot of when it came out but I cant remember any of it cept "Once Upon A Time In My Life" and when I first heard it I was like "Annie Dog?" this is WEAK! Ill give it a spin tomorrow--you ought to throw on Machina again--what did you think of Zwan?
|
|
|
|
Post by sisyphus on Mar 13, 2006 1:06:28 GMT -5
your observations about L.Cohen are spot on....
|
|
|
|
Post by sisyphus on Mar 13, 2006 1:07:16 GMT -5
billy corgan grew into a beautiful zwan after all...
|
|
|
|
Post by Dr. Drum on Mar 13, 2006 7:30:25 GMT -5
Dr. Drum: There is no resistance! I am a not a non fan of Cohens--the day I heard his first album -- the Songs of Leonard Cohen--I was obsessed. It was the craziest stuff I had ever heard--The nest few weeks afterward were a cohen fest. I just did not understand why a person throwing out such great lyrics had such a weak musical sense by the time I got to Im Your Man. Its not a cheap shot im taking at him, I am saying its a SHAME--at least for selfish reasons. I understand alot of time had elapsed and maybe he just wanted to say something and didn't care about who accompanys....but as someone who pays for every disc every time they come out its like--"CMON!" The music could (should) compliment what hes saying. Maybe Im not listening closely enough....I really dont think thats the case. wayved – Hey, don’t get me wrong, I understood that you were coming at it as a fan and not taking a cheap shot, so no worries there. I think Cohen actually wanted I’m Your Man to sound the way it does, believe it or not. I have some old interviews with him from the time of the record’s release. I’ll have to dig them out and refresh my memory but I know he was pretty keen at the time to remain current. Of course, producers, musicians and the techs who make the gear have learned a lot since the 80s about how to make synthetic sounds warmer, richer, fuller, whatever… Probably would have been a much different sounding album if it had come out in 1998 instead of 1988. I actually did pull Adore out on the weekend, btw, and its not epochal or anything but it holds up reasonably well IMO. Tried the same with Machina but I didn’t get so far with that one... As for Zwan, I liked it when it came out but it didn’t really stick for me beyond that. |
|
|
|
Post by JesusLooksLikeMe on Mar 13, 2006 12:31:29 GMT -5
Drum, I love "Glass and the Ghost Children" ... nice sprawling, moody epic with some neat Joy Div style guitars to kick off.
And yeah laylebops, Bobby G was always the coolest fucker on the planet and I've always envied that bastard. Definitely the rock star I'd have been. Fuck Noel Gallagher.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul on Mar 14, 2006 9:12:00 GMT -5
I thought of another terrible album by a good band...
Mardi Gras -- Creedence Clearwater Revival
Really, this waste of an ablum is a sad end to a magnificent band. With the exception of maybe 3 songs, most of the album is unlistenalbe, and borderline laughable. I can't believe the same great mind that brought us Green River, Willie & the Poor Boys, Cosmos Factory, and Pendellum (CCR's most underrated album), wrote the crap that's on Mardi Gras. This album should only be purchased by completist; otherwise, don't bother.
|
|
|
|
Post by digmomusic on Mar 14, 2006 10:12:26 GMT -5
Paul - isn't Mardi Gras the album where Fogerty finally agreed to relinquish a little control and let Cook and Clifford write some songs? Seems like that was the reason it sucked for the most part, and the only decent songs were of course penned by Fogerty. I remember buying that LP without realizing the circumstances surrounding its creation and being very disappointed as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by phil on Mar 14, 2006 10:22:18 GMT -5
Paul - isn't Mardi Gras the album where Fogerty finally agreed to relinquish a little control
and let Cook and Clifford write some songs?Yep ! That's exactly what happened ... ! Music by Cook & Clifford ... Sure don't sound as exciting as Lennon/McCartney ... 
|
|
|
|
Post by Kensterberg on Mar 14, 2006 10:23:25 GMT -5
Yeah, Mardi Gras is total crap. I've got the complete CCR box set (every fan of American roots-rock needs this, BTW), and I've listened to it in chronological order more than a few times. When you get to Mardi Gras (and to a lesser extent the record before it), the project just becomes unlistenable. Really, really horrid stuff ... even the Fogerty tracks aren't his best work (though they sound a hell of a lot better when surrounded by this crap).
I should've remembered this one in my initial list ... I guess it's one of those records that's so awful that I've tried to just erase it from my mind ... just like Goodbye Cruel World.
Hmm ... anyone interested in putting together a definitive list of the worst records in rock?
|
|
|
|
Post by phil on Mar 14, 2006 10:25:56 GMT -5
HÉ ! Elvis must have put out a few stinkers back in the Good Ol' Days ...
|
|
|
|
Post by phil on Mar 14, 2006 10:27:39 GMT -5
Worst Beatles album ...
Rolling Stones ...
David Bowie ...
The Who ...
Billy Joel ... ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Kensterberg on Mar 14, 2006 11:02:42 GMT -5
If I remember right, there's an Elvis Presley LP that consisted entirely of Elvis' comments on stage between songs, etc. I think it was called "Having Fun on Stage" or something like that ... easily the worst record in the King's catalog, I would expect. Some of those movie soundtracks were real stinkers, too. Worst Beatles ... Any of the issues that were the lads backing up Tony Sheridan (these tapes have surfaced under a lot of different names, but all are to be avoided). Really awful, with none of the spark that can make the early Hamburg recordings worth hearing (even if the sound quality of those tapes is so low as to make VU bootlegs sound like hi-fi!). I don't think there can be a whole lot of disagreement about this. Rolling Stones ... hoo boy, so much to choose from here. As bad as Dirty Work is, it has some serious competition for this title from Bridges to Babylon, and the abysmal early eighties live LP Still Life (which was all too descriptive a title). Those are the three really obvious ones to me, and I'd probably have to say that B to B is the worst Stones studio LP, and Still Life the worst live recording, and leave it at that. But there are lots of bad Stones LPs, so there's plenty of room for disagreement here. David Bowie ... Worst studio LP: Never Let Me Down, though Diamond Dogs comes close IMHO. Also, there are those David Jones tapes from before Space Oddity that are at best mediocre mid-to-late sixties pop/rock, which would also be in the running. Worst live LP: duh! It's David Live, of course. Really horrible record, as I'm sure you folks recall. As for the absolute worst David Bowie release ... god it's hard to argue with David Live. The Who ... never made a bad record! Just kidding, kind of. I will stand by the statement that the original lineup (Daltrey, Townshend, Entwistle, Moon) never made a bad record. The worst thing that had the imprint of all four members was probably the Magic Bus/Who on Tour package, but even that is merely a badly assembled (and misleedingly packaged) collection of singles, etc., and nowhere near as bad as Face Dances (which is the worst Who studio LP). But none of the Who's studio records are anywhere near as bad as any of the live recordings done immediately after the band's demise (i.e. Who's Last), which are truly the nadir of the band's recordings. Billy Joel ... oh the vast selection ... this is by far the toughest, as so many of his records are so bad on so many levels. I'm inclinded to go with The Stranger or 52nd Street as these were the records which cemented his dark rise to fame and power, and both suffer from pretentions (both musically towards real rock, and lyrically towards subject matter which far exceeded his very, very, limited grasp) which go far beyond the obvious surface flaws of Joel's grating voice and mannerisms, shiny Broadway smooth production, and hackneyed arrangements. But Billy Joel's catalog is such an using cesspool that you, gentle listener, can just reach in (with eyes preferably closed, and wearing protective gloves), grab a title at random, and be assured that what you'll catch is representative of Mr. Joel's status as the rock and roll anti-christ.  |
|
